 |
 |
|
Compiled By GayToday Burlington, Vermont—The diligent tracking by Hawaiian marriage activist Martin Rice of a letter sent to residents of Vermont by fundamentalist-backed anti-gay Hawaiian groups and signed by ten Hawaiian state senators, has exposed a strain of propaganda that's backfired in Vermont where political meddling by outsiders remains unappreciated. The cost of sending the letter to every Vermont resident totaled $40,000 and was paid by another fundamentalist front group, Citizens for Community Values in Cincinnati, Ohio. Rice told GayToday: "This is one of the sleaziest bits of propaganda that I've seen in a long time. It even beats the end-of-the-campaign panic commercials depicting a man stating that he wanted to marry his dog. (Anti-gay crusader) Gabbard's side of the campaign was underhanded, a fact to which he conveniently omits." Rice says that "at least one (Hawaiian) Senator said he was surprised to learn that his name had been added to this letter. He was told, he said, that the letter was intended for Vermont Legislators, urging them not to use hate and hyperbole when discussing BTLG-related issues." The full text of the letter follows: An Open Letter from Hawai`i's Citizens to Vermont's Citizens Aloha, Vermont friends. Vermont and Hawai`i are different in many ways We are in the tropics you are in the rugged mountains of the Northeast We have the most racially and religiously diverse population of the United States you have the most homogenous. You were the first state to join the Union after the original thirteen colonies; we were the last. Despite these differences, we share much in common. Our states are small in land area and population. Our states are both rich in natural beauty and our peoples are sensitive to environmental concerns. We are accepting of others as individuals and place a high value on matters of fairness and compassion. just as your citizens do. We also share a common civic crisis. In late 1990 three homosexual couples applied for and were denied marriage licenses under the laws of the State of Hawai'i. The three couples then sued Hawai`i for what they termed "their right to marry". This began a controversy that dominated Hawai'i's political and legislative arenas for seven years In 1997 three homosexual couples applied for and were denied marriage licenses under the laws of the State of Vermont. The three couples then sued Vermont for what they termed "their right to marry". Thus they ensured that you would continue the national controversy begun in Hawai'i in 1990. Because we citizens of Hawai`i have been there already. we want to share with you some of what we have seen and experienced over the past seven years concerning this issue. We offer our perspective in the spirit or aloha as a gift of friendship in the hope that you will he both informed and aware as you face this issue in Vermont. The stakes are very high. The decisions made in Vermont will impact the entire nation and the world. In Hawai'i, we did riot think that a handful of judges should override the will of the people and the religious traditions and cultural values that have stood the test of time for thousands of years. In Vermont, you are now facing the same scenario. The controversy in Hawai'i was answered at the Federal level by the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA. 1996). The DOMA bill passed both the House and Senate with near unanimous votes. President Clinton signed it into law. The law states that for all Federal purposes marriage is defined as between one man and one woman. DOMA also allows individual states to adopt 1egislation refusing to recognize marriages from other states if they do not qualify as legal in that state. Thirty-one states have DOMA bills. If Vermont allows "same-sex marriage" the 18 other states without DOMA bills may be forced to accept those marriages as legal. In Hawai'i this was promoted as a boon for tourism "think of thousands of homosexual couples coming to a gay Las Vegas to marry." More cautious citizens imagined the tens of thousands who would choose not to come. Vermont's own tourism industry and its proximity to Boston, New York and Montreal should raise similar concerns. We found that folks on both sides of this issue shared some common values and rules. Many individuals with deeply held beliefs but opposite views were able to discuss and share in ways that honored our Hawai'ian culture of tolerance. Both sides began their campaigns with passion, determination and most important--civility. This was not to last. As the pro-same-sex marriage strategy emerged, we saw a strong reliance on the tactics of repeating misinformation until it was accepted as fact, ignoring inconvenient realities, and demonizing the opposition. Any person or group standing up for traditional marriage was accused of being "homophobic" and "discriminatory. Those who based their views on their religious beliefs were the most viciously attacked. Our Roman Catholic, Mormon and conservative Protestant communities, whom we value for their histories of charity and compassion, were consistently characterized as "hate-filled bigots". Despite the fact that this national issue attracted outside groups and offshore money from both camps to Hawai'i, the "same-sex marriage" groups consistently misrepresented themselves as "just us locals" under siege by hordes of right-wing zealots from the Mainland. . . Moderation was not tolerated. People who had supported previous "gay rights" initiatives became enemies of the cause if they found "gay marriage" to be a step too far for them to support. Some who publicly supported traditional marriage lost their jobs -- some had their businesses boycotted or harassed The press largely supported the "same-sex marriage" groups adopting their views and repeating their misinformation. This greatly handicapped us We are encouraged to report that the power of the people prevailed over the power of the press The citizens who stood publicly for the value of, traditional marriage evidenced courage in the face of adversity. Our legislature also had that courage. In 1997 the pro-"Traditional Marriage" amendment to the Hawai`i Constitution passed by 44-6 in the House and 24-0 in the Senate. In November of 1998. Hawai'i's voters accepted the amendment with a 69% majority. We wish our friends in Vermont a similar result. This will require courage and resolve. We believe that traditional marriage, between one man and one woman, richly benefits our society. We believe that traditional marriage provides the best place to raise and nurture our children. We have successfully defended Traditional Marriage in Hawai'i. We wish you the same success in Vermont. Save Traditional Marriage and Alliance for Traditional Marriage Hawai'i and Sen David M Matsuura (D) Sen. Jan Yagi Buen (D) Sen. Sam Slom (R) Sen. Norman Sakamotd (D) Sen. Jonathon Chun (D) Rep Dennis Arakaki (D) Rep Bob McDermott (R) Rep. Colleen Meyer (R) Rep. Mark Moses (R) Rep. Michael Puamamo Rahikina (D) |
